Showing posts with label Elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Elections. Show all posts

Friday, November 7, 2014

What the Midterm Election Results Mean

Dr. Gerard Emershaw


The GOP took control of the Senate in the 2014 midterm elections and increased their control of the House of Representatives. While it is essentially the rule that the party in the White House will lose Congressional seats in midterm elections, these results were particularly difficult on President Obama and the Democrats. Unified government has been rare in recent decades. Presidents Clinton and Obama each enjoyed Democratic control of Congress for only two years during their administrations while President George W. Bush enjoyed Republican dominance in Congress for more than half of his two terms in the White House. President Obama will finish his second term as a lame duck.

While even a crystal ball would be inadequate to predict what Congress or the White House may attempt to do in the next two years, the following is a list of likely possibilities.

1. The Budget

The continuing resolution, the funding bill which keeps the federal government from shutting down, expires on December 11. Incoming Republican Senate Majority leader vows that although the GOP plans to use the budget to force President Obama to change policies, there will not be a government shutdown. It is likely that another continuing resolution will be passed by the outgoing Congress before the end of the year. The budget battle in 2015 may prove to be very interesting, however. There is likely to be a bitter split within the Republican Party in Congress between Tea Party legislators such as Ted Cruz and Rand Paul and the more moderate Rockefeller RINO types.  House Republicans are likely to be more conservative, but their Republican colleagues in the Senate are likely to be wary of pushing a budget that may be seen as too extreme. In 2016, 24 of the 34 Senators up for re-election will be Republicans, and several of these will be from traditionally blue states. This strongly suggests that to avoid a shutdown and to avoid the appearance of extremism that could harm moderate Republican re-election bids in 2016, the GOP will steer a cautious course and attempt to pass a budget that is bipartisan.

2. Keystone XL Pipeline

After the budget, the top GOP priority with their new majority is to pass a bill for the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline, a 1,660-mile pipeline from Alberta, Canada, to Texas that has been under consideration for six years. The State Department has been reviewing the pipeline proposal, and a pending lawsuit involving the pipeline’s route through Nebraska has left this review in limbo. While it appears that the Senate has a filibuster proof majority in favor of the pipeline, it is unclear whether there are enough votes (67) to override a veto. President Obama is likely to veto any Keystone XL Pipeline bill that may pass before the State Department completes its review. However, if the issues concerning Nebraska and any other similar issues can be resolved, there is a good chance that a compromise can be hammered out between the GOP and the Democrats. With the economy likely to remain a major issue in 2016, President Obama may be willing to desert his environmentalist activist supporters in order to help bring about what is a widely popular piece of legislation.

3. Immigration

President Obama continues to claim that he will seek to do something major on immigration before the end of the year, likely some form of amnesty for illegal aliens. Senator Ted Cruz and five other Republican Senators have warned that they will do everything possible to prevent the President from doing an end run around Congress on the immigration issue. Dealing with immigration is a power directly given to Congress in the Constitution. Any attempts on the part of President Obama to grant amnesty through executive action would be blatantly unconstitutional. With the problematic Obamacare as his only true domestic achievement, the lame duck President may very well risk the fallout that will result and bring about amnesty through Executive Order.  Americans are divided on the issue of amnesty for illegal immigrants. In a recent Huffington Post/YouGov poll conducted just prior to the midterm elections, 46% opposed a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants while 40% were in favor. President Obama’s handling of the immigration issue was among the lowest in terms of approval by the American public, resulting in any action on it being delayed until after the election. President Obama has shown little respect for the Constitution and has defied the limitations that it imposes again and again. However, there may be room for a compromise that will give President Obama the amnesty that he seeks while granting the GOP the stricter border control that it desires. Mitt Romney has recently suggested that the GOP should pass immigration reform that includes some form of amnesty. While there is evidence that the GOP can succeed in the near future and win elections even without passing amnesty, mainstream Republicans may do it in an attempt to broaden its appeal among Latino voters with the 2016 election in mind. President Reagan, who was more conservative than the average mainstream Republican Senator today, compromised on amnesty in 1986, so it is not implausible that the GOP will do something similar before the 2016 elections.

4. War

President Obama’s foreign policy has been a disaster. He has acted unconstitutionally by waging war in Libya against the Qaddafi regime and in Iraq and Syria against the Islamic State. He has indirectly aided the Islamic State and other Jihadists in Syria and Iraq. He continues his unconstitutional drone campaign in Yemen, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. All of this continues to threaten the United States with future blowback. In addition, President Obama continues to maintain a posture with Russia that is further threatening to reignite the Cold War.

Most Republicans in the Congress are not noninterventionists like former Congressman Ron Paul or foreign policy realists like Senator Rand Paul. Therefore, it is increasingly likely that the GOP-controlled Congress will sanction President Obama’s unconstitutional warmongering, blessing it with the illusion of constitutionality. Congress may even encourage President Obama to widen the war against the Islamic State. Given that the GOP has favored invasion, regime change, and nation building over the Democrat strategy of more selective bombing and droning, the likelihood is that President Obama will continue or even escalate his warmongering approach to foreign policy during the next two years.

5. Audit the Fed

Former Congressman Ron Paul fought in vain for years to pass legislation to audit the Federal Reserve. A version of Paul’s bill was passed in the House, but Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid continually prevented a similar measure from being voted upon in the Senate. Senator Ted Cruz has vowed that a GOP takeover in the Senate would mean that the auditing the Federal Reserve would become a top Republican priority. This raises many questions which will be answered over the next two years. Will the GOP have the courage to pass Audit the Fed in the Senate? Would President Obama veto such a bill? Could supporters find enough votes to override a veto? Would an audit of the Federal Reserve truly have teeth? What would an honest and thorough audit of the Federal Reserve find? How would the American people react?

6. Obamacare

Senator Mitch McConnell, the soon to be Republican Senate Majority Leader, has already openly stated that a full repeal of Obamacare is not on his mind. While, of course, President Obama would veto any such legislation, the fact that the GOP is unwilling to even use that option to make a statement speaks volumes. McConnell claims instead that the GOP will use the appropriations process in order to bring about a “partial” repeal of Obamacare.

What does this mean? In short, it means that Obamacare is here to stay. The GOP will at most attempt to tweak it a little bit around the edges, perhaps saving pennies on the dollar. However, as almost always, big government never gets any smaller. Despite having had majorities in the past and having had full control of the federal government at times in the recent past, the GOP has never repealed any Collectivist Nanny State Progressive machinery. The New Deal is alive and well as is the Great Society’s “War on Poverty” and the Department of Education.  In addition, the GOP has made government even larger when it could, adding Nixon’s “War on Drugs” and Bush’s Department of Homeland Security. Not only will Obamacare still be around come 2016, it is likely that similar to the unconstitutional programs of the New Deal, Obamacare will still be around 75 years in the future.

(For a much more detailed discussion of government and political issues, read my new book The Real Culture War: Individualism vs. Collectivism & How Bill O’Reilly Got It All Wrong. Available now on Amazon in both print and Kindle.)


Wednesday, April 16, 2014

Voter ID Laws

by Gerard Emershaw

Democrats and Republicans are partisanly divided over the issue of voter ID laws. Whether or not a potential voter must present identification in order to vote, and if so, what forms of identification are acceptable, varies from state to state. Thirty states have enacted some form of voter ID law for the alleged purpose of preventing voter fraud.



Some claim that voter ID laws serve to disenfranchise minorities and the poor. President Obama has recently claimed that voter rights are threatened by voter ID laws. According to a study conducted by NYU’s Brennan Center, 11% of voting-age citizens (21 million) lack necessary photo ID. A disproportionate number of these Americans lacking photo ID are low income, racial and ethnic minorities, and the elderly. Many of these people cannot afford the fees associated with obtaining a photo ID. Some Americans—particularly elderly rural blacks—do not have a birth certificate and sometimes lack the means to acquire one in order to be eligible to receive a photo ID.



Those who support voter ID laws do so because they claim voter fraud is a significant danger. However, there is little evidence that voter fraud has been a widespread problem in American elections. For example, a 2007 analysis done by The New York Times found that there were only 120 cases of voter fraud filed in five years by the Department of Justice, and these resulted in only 86 convictions.



One need not be a cynic to view much of this as what it really is. Part of it is clearly a ploy by desperate RINOs to disenfranchise votes that are more likely to go to Democratic rivals. Instead of staying true to conservative principles and seeking to attract non-traditional Republicans to the conservative cause, RINOs simply wish to shrink the voting pool. This will not work for long, and will eventually just lead to the demise of the GOP. If Republicans want to ensure that voter fraud does not occur, why not in addition to voter ID laws, fund and staff programs to ensure that every adult American has an acceptable form of ID? The fact is that many Republicans want to disenfranchise Democratic voters and many want to have the issue to use as red meat to energize its conservative base.



However, Democrats are equally guilty here. Coming up with a national or state-by-state strategy in which citizens lacking a photo ID could be aided financially and logistically to obtain one would not be particularly difficult or costly. The federal government and the state governments clearly waste taxpayer money on nonsense, so certainly some bored and lazy government workers and the necessary funds could be found to make this a reality. The truth is that the Democrats do not want those without photo ID to be empowered. They want these people to be dependent upon the government in general and upon the Democratic Party in particular. The Democrats want to have the race card to play as red meat for their base. The best way to prevent alleged racists from disenfranchising poor minority voters without photo IDs would be to help these voters get photo IDs. Yet, year after year, this does not happen.



Even if cases of voter ID prosecuted are rare, this does not mean that voter fraud is not a problem. Even if no cases are ever prosecuted, this does not mean that voter fraud does not occur. Even the possibility of voter fraud is unacceptable if it can be prevented. Democracy does not mean merely that periodically there is an election and people vote. Many nations have elections, but many of these nations are not even close to being true democratic republics. Consider Afghanistan and Iraq. Between candidates and parties being barred from running, crooked criminals and American puppets running, violence intimidating voters, and fraudulent practices, neither of these nations is likely to have a truly fair and democratic election anytime soon. American elections need to be kept as clean and fair as possible. There is often only a razor’s edge between a true democratic republic and a banana republic with bogus elections.


While the Constitution does not explicitly guarantee citizens a right to vote, it is obvious that such a right would be covered by the Ninth Amendment. Thus, in an important sense, denying eligible voters the ability to vote due to voter ID laws without ensuring that they can easily obtain the required type of ID is a violation of a natural right. 



This controversy is easily solved. Institute programs within the states to ensure that all American adults have photo IDs. Then institute and enforce voter ID laws. How difficult is this? Instead, despite the fact that there is generally so little relevant difference between the major American political parties, the Republicans and Democrats feel the need to play games and use the issue for propaganda purposes. This is yet another reason why mainstream American politics needs to change.